For years, someone turned off Broadway at the end of a busy workday and pulled into the driveway at 152 Burr Road. And another family received mail at 153 Perry Court – the mailbox is still there, right behind a zoning change request notice. The addresses that once served homes are now part of four vacant lots that will be discussed, perhaps heatedly, at Thursday’s San Antonio City Council meeting.
Thriving and growing, the University of the Incarnate Word needs parking space, and school officials have petitioned to change the zoning of the four residential lots to allow construction of a 33-space parking lot for faculty and staff. The change is opposed by City staff, the zoning commission and the Mahncke Park Neighborhood Association (MPNA).
The MPNA held an email vote on July 31 gauging board opinion on the UIW zoning request. Four of the six members voted against the zoning change, but left a “final” decision open until they could hear from UIW and gather opinions from residents. A vocal group of neighbors found the openness extremely disconcerting, and launched its own campaign against the rezoning initiative with a logo, yard signs and an independent Facebook page. The virtual exchanges among neighbors got very heated.
UIW has grown exponentially in the past decade, and they are in critical need of additional parking. Lou Fox, San Antonio’s former city manager and assistant to the president for community relations and campus security, said the university is sensitive to Mahncke Park neighbors’ concerns.
“We are planning a limited number of parking spaces – 33 to be exact – for faculty and staff. Ingress and egress to the parking lot is on Burr Road, with no additional traffic on Perry Court. We are designing appropriate screening between the lot and the neighborhood, and the lot will have lighting and regular patrols by our police for security,” Fox said. He noted that the San Antonio Country Club has a parking lot in the immediate vicinity, albeit in the city of Alamo Heights.
On Sept. 11, UIW officials met with the MPNA board and presented their plan, expressing their commitment to work with the neighborhood to make their presence as palatable as possible. It is true that Perry Court and the surrounding streets already carry a parking burden as students, faculty and staff park and walk to the nearby campus. From a certain perspective, a 33-space faculty lot might ease some of that congestion.
University officials also promised not to build any more parking lots in the neighborhood for five years and to offer assistance to the MPNA in converting the Mahncke Park fountain to non-potable water in response to San Antonio Water System restrictions on public fountains.
The MPNA board did not take a vote that night, but by Sept. 24, they had voted against approving the zone variance. By the time Julie Miller, the MPNA secretary released the board’s determination and clarification of their position, the controversy had become very personal, as reflected on a Facebook page that neighbors in Mahncke Park created (not affiliated with the MPNA).
On Sept. 31, Mike Bartels, board president, sent a letter to members calling a special meeting prior to Thursday’s City Council session to “re-vote” the matter. In his letter, he defended the university’s efforts. He said that the parking problem was shared by the neighborhood and the university and that the lot is “a start” toward relieving the problem.
The neighborhood has been urging the university to encourage alternate means of transportation on campus and by helping support “a Mahncke Park for Alternative Transportation” fund to improve sidewalks, crosswalks, bike lanes and pedestrian paths along Broadway between Mulberry and Hildebrand. If more students and employees came to campus via public transportation or by bicycle, the parking problem would diminish. Bartels, however, seemed to feel that UIW has been doing its best.
“The bar set by MPNA was very high and we felt that should UIW meet this goal, we as a neighborhood could move forward. We could start working on other areas presented in the MPNA plan, knowing we created a new partner in the process,” Bartels wrote.
The Mahncke Park Neighborhood Association is one of the city’s oldest such organizations, filing the first defined Neighborhood Plan to the city in 1983. Built around George Brackenridge’s donated strip of land connecting the old San Antonio Waterworks (now the San Antonio Botanical Garden and Brackenridge Park), Mahncke Park neighborhood has a wildly diverse mixture of residential properties ranging from elegant 1920’s era homes to poorly maintained, low-rent apartments. Part of the neighborhood served as a “tenderloin” district to Fort Sam Houston with bars and seedy night denizens for many years. When neighbors organized their association in the late 1970s, they took on a daunting cause. Those years produced experienced and strong-minded veterans in the fight to preserve the neighborhood. No one, it seems, wants any of Perry Court’s residents to have to live across the street, or next door, to a parking lot.
On the other side of the argument, the tree-lined UIW campus is one of the area’s true amenities. Among San Antonio’s three Catholic institutions of higher learning, UIW under long-serving President Lou Agnese, Jr. is has grown steadily in both size, quality of education and ambition. In other words, the very proximity of UIW arguably adds value to the neighborhood just as Trinity University adds value to the Monte Vista neighborhood and happens to have the same vehicle parking challenges.
The MPNA neighborhood plan submitted nearly 30 years ago specifies that institutional parking lots are not contiguous with the neighborhood’s character. The City of San Antonio’s Development Services department concurs that the parking lot would have an adverse impact on the neighborhood. The zoning commission also opposes the zoning change. John Jacks, assistant director of development services, summed up their disapproval:
“The basis for our denial is that the proposed parking lot is an encroachment that is not consistent or compatible with the neighborhood plan, which specifically recommends against parking lots for institutional use,” Jacks said.
Now the issue comes before City Council, and both side are expected to show up in force to make their case.
“If the Council is inclined to grant the conditional use of the property for the parking lot, we have recommended that the ordinance mandate specific improvements to screen the lot from the residential areas,” Jacks said.
Amy Estes, who lives at 158 Perry Court, located about 200 feet from the proposed parking lot, does not want to live next door to a parking lot. She has corresponded with university officials, offering five suggestions for other uses of the land (including an edible schoolyard, Habit for Humanity houses, green student housing and a pocket park). She also sent a letter to Mayor Julián Castro, and she has collected zoning cards and petition signatures opposing the parking lot. Estes developed a plat graphic that shows 15 neighboring households either signing the petition, returning zoning cards or both.
Two of the residents I talked with last week expressed concerns that UIW was “land banking” in the neighborhood for future development. I emailed Fox with a followup to our interview, asking the question, “Does UIW plan future acquisitions in the Mahncke Park neighborhood?” He replied, “We have no plans for more property that I am aware of.” This round of conversations with the Mahncke Park neighbors may have convinced the university such expansion is simply not a viable option — at least for now.
gary s. whitford is half of Extraordinary Words, a writing company. He lives and works in the Monticello Park neighborhood, and prefers to see his name in lower case letters.
My family had a Perry Court address when I was an infant. This is an interesting and well written article. So happy to have been directed to it via fb. I am hoping that the neighborhood concerns are honored and respected. You wear the reporter’s fedora well my friend!
Thirty three spots.
I would hope and I believe… if the college considered a strong campaign for alternative modes of transportation, offered incentives for riding transit, installed bike lockers (not just bike racks)….for example…they could probably encourage MORE than 33 people to start adjusting their commute. This is a less expensive way to go forward and more friendly to the environment and the community.
We can not build our way out of congestion…we must be innovative and creative.
Thirty three spots will become 50 will become 100….UNLESS there is a proactive effort to change “business as usual”.
Very well written. Sheds light on a complicated neighborhood issue. I might add that just within the last month my husband and I passed on a beautiful home that was for sale on Mt. Erin Pass (over by the UIW pharmacy school). UIW had recently purchased a lot across the street and had bulldozed the house and was pouring asphalt. Encroachment like this was more than we wanted for our future. No telling how many lots they are planning to consume. What about the ATT property across the street? Or maybe it’s time to relocate the Incarnate Word HS?
I strongly agree with Lydia. Innovation, bike and pedestrian culture should be cultivated and encouraged. The UIW goes against it’s own order of sisters when making decision of neighborliness, and conservation. They built new dorms on top of the hill closest to the Blue Hole, (ignoring objections) and did not put in adequate storm water controls. Now, they are going to demolish a mid-century modern building on campus. The Manhke Park association is smart for uniting and standing strong there is no other way to quash this. Now, just don’t let city council sell you out. Best of luck! I will be liking and sharing your page.
If only the Edwards Aquifer has a similarly strong HOA to advocate on its behalf.
Lou Agnese is an empire builder; one can’t trust him. The end.
That is an understatement.
Very well written. Just wondering if the brand new garage on the 281 side is always at 100% capacity.
As part time faculty at UIW, I can attest that parking is a HUGE issue. I arrive mid-day, and have spent 45 minutes + looking for parking on campus. Yes, all garages have been totally full.
I can also attest, that the set up for bike and foot traffic is incredibly poor. No bike paths go directly to campus, and it’s difficult to ride bikes on campus, not to mention very few racks to park bikes. Even pedestrian paths are lacking outside the center of campus.
I finally gave up my P parking pass for a free “A” pass which gave me a space in an ATT lot across Broadway. I was told there were 81 spaces, and so few FT staff and faculty took them up on the offer of free parking, they opened it up to us adjuncts. It’s still not even close to full. Which leads me to wonder – will people actually park there? My walk to my office is now shorter than if I parked in some areas of campus, and I’m always guaranteed a spot (tho sometimes I walk or cycle, depending on how much time I have). In discussing it with other faculty, they seemed very hesitant to park “so far away.”
Cherise, thanks for your input. I am a full time faculty at UIW and was under the impression that the ATT lot was ONLY for staff–full timers were never given a chance to take advantage of it that I am aware of. If this is true–that as of Oct 4 the lot is still not full, this in and of itself is an area in which the university has dropped the ball. I am positive that we could find 81 people to sign up for those FREE spaces if all were made aware of their availability–I for one would do so!
I will investigate tomorrow about this. This is really disconcerting.
Julie, did you get more info?
I don’t remember exactly the date I received the email (and can’t find it now). It was mid-September. Also bear in mind that I heard multiple stories from the staff about the availability. After receiving the email, I went to inquire and was told these spaces were only available for full time STAFF. I went back and looked at the email, that specified part time faculty as well. When I went back, and discussed with someone else, I was told that indeed they started with FT staff, then offered to FT faculty, then offered to PT faculty (me). I share an office with ~10 adjuncts, and all have said they don’t want to park so far away, though in fact, it’s closer than where I usually parked on campus.
Now, there are always many (maybe 20) free spaces when I am there, but as PT, I am only there 2 days per week. They only allotted 81 passes though, so on the other 3 days, “my” space is empty. Hence, they may have indeed 81 individuals with assigned spaces. If they planned well, they could coordinate the spaces (like we do for our office space). I would be happy to be allotted my free space for only the two days I need it, and someone there on the other 3 days could have it.
In any case, I’ve also heard people express fear of walking “that far.” I live in Southtown, so I’ve considered walking from home (if I didn’t have to carry a computer and had more time…I do walk to UIW for my exercise/training walk), so I have a hard time understanding that.
Oh, and FREE was nice. Having an adjunct’s salary, not paying for parking is a huge bonus. I would gladly accept a tradeoff of only having my space for the days I’m assigned.
Well written article. Interesting to see how this will play out.